1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Well she also wants the deal brought into force, and a public vote at the least risks that and more likely ensures it won't. If it is going to be rejected might as well have it be by parliament. She can then do the same thing later as Corbyn and co will do, and claim their Brexit plan would have worked out great, had parliament but given them the chance.
Any idea what time the Deal gets mullered on Tuesday? I doubt I'll be able to watch it live, but as many as can should do so, it will be a moment of history to see the first formal step toward us remaining.
Division is expected to be called at 10pm with the result due at circa 10.15pm.
However this may move if more amendments are accepted.
So later then, Bercow needs to have his fun after all, and it prolongs the agony for the government.
Any idea what time the Deal gets mullered on Tuesday? I doubt I'll be able to watch it live, but as many as can should do so, it will be a moment of history to see the first formal step toward us remaining.
Division is expected to be called at 10pm with the result due at circa 10.15pm.
However this may move if more amendments are accepted.
Rumours circulating in Twitterland of at least 5 Tory PPSes planning to resign and vote against the deal.
The only new name I’ve seen bruited who has not previously come out against is Tom Pursglove. If he comes out against, this sucker is going dahn bigstyle - he’d positioned himself till now very astutely to be able to vote for the deal with a heavy heart when required. If he’s not doing that, the defeat is likely to be bigger than anticipated.
It's being anticipated to be 150+ at least isn't it? The most optimistic I've seen was *around* 100 and many well over 200. How much bigger could it possibly get?
He ranks about number 120 on my list of potential rebels. That implies just over 200 voting for the deal, so going down by more than 200.
I count another 13 Conservative MPs still unconfirmed. I’d assumed they’d all vote for the deal but that assumption now looks unsafe.
Betfair most likely number voting Aye is around 225 implying around 390 voting No i.e. a majority against the government of around 165. This would be reduced by any abstentions.
Wild idea here, but does anything think the Cabinet have even coalesced around a plan B yet? Unofficially of course. It'd be nice to think May will at least be able to present a coherent plan B to the House pretty soon after the MV without yet more bloody resignations.
No other manager for United, including Busby and Ferguson, have won their first six games
It's an omen for Remain. United have their mojo back and Remain is going to win in the end.
United have after all always been very pro Europe :-)
Or maybe a 'Norway' deal.
I was there when Ole scored in the Camp Nou (May 1999) and it topped nearly 50 years supporting the club with the treble, the only English club to achieve the feat.
A glorious night indeed!
Here's hoping that night proves a metaphor for Brexit, with Remain wining in injury time!
Rumours circulating in Twitterland of at least 5 Tory PPSes planning to resign and vote against the deal.
The only new name I’ve seen bruited who has not previously come out against is Tom Pursglove. If he comes out against, this sucker is going dahn bigstyle - he’d positioned himself till now very astutely to be able to vote for the deal with a heavy heart when required. If he’s not doing that, the defeat is likely to be bigger than anticipated.
It's being anticipated to be 150+ at least isn't it? The most optimistic I've seen was *around* 100 and many well over 200. How much bigger could it possibly get?
He ranks about number 120 on my list of potential rebels. That implies just over 200 voting for the deal, so going down by more than 200.
I count another 13 Conservative MPs still unconfirmed. I’d assumed they’d all vote for the deal but that assumption now looks unsafe.
Betfair most likely number voting Aye is around 225 implying around 390 voting No i.e. a majority against the government of around 165. This would be reduced by any abstentions.
So a mere 80-90 to flip to their side. Piece of cake.
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Well she also wants the deal brought into force, and a public vote at the least risks that and more likely ensures it won't. If it is going to be rejected might as well have it be by parliament. She can then do the same thing later as Corbyn and co will do, and claim their Brexit plan would have worked out great, had parliament but given them the chance.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
I agree and I think it is likely. I don't think May could propose that but I suspect she would be relived if "parliament took control" and proposed it, and she would facilitate it.
Any idea what time the Deal gets mullered on Tuesday? I doubt I'll be able to watch it live, but as many as can should do so, it will be a moment of history to see the first formal step toward us remaining.
Division is expected to be called at 10pm with the result due at circa 10.15pm.
However this may move if more amendments are accepted.
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Well she also wants the deal brought into force, and a public vote at the least risks that and more likely ensures it won't. If it is going to be rejected might as well have it be by parliament. She can then do the same thing later as Corbyn and co will do, and claim their Brexit plan would have worked out great, had parliament but given them the chance.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
I don't understand this 'pass the deal contingent on a referendum to confirm it' suggestion for the MV. Leaving aside all the comments that a referendum would be a terrible idea, since of course the government would say that at this moment in time, how exactly is it better for them to pre-concede that? It doesn't seem more likely to guarantee the deal is on the ballot, since something has to go up against remain anyway, and given Labour are currently still following policy of pretending they can do a renegotiation why would they accept a deal confirmed by referendum before they've even gone through their motions of defeating the deal, then trying out a GE and so on?
I presume that's why you consider it unlikely, but it seems really really unlikely because it cuts of political angles too soon.
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Well she also wants the deal brought into force, and a public vote at the least risks that and more likely ensures it won't. If it is going to be rejected might as well have it be by parliament. She can then do the same thing later as Corbyn and co will do, and claim their Brexit plan would have worked out great, had parliament but given them the chance.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
The Betfair rule is "This market refers to the FIRST MEANINGFUL VOTE ONLY. Any vote on amendments do not count." I don't really understand that so would be reluctant to bet on it.
Any idea what time the Deal gets mullered on Tuesday? I doubt I'll be able to watch it live, but as many as can should do so, it will be a moment of history to see the first formal step toward us remaining.
Division is expected to be called at 10pm with the result due at circa 10.15pm.
However this may move if more amendments are accepted.
Sky just said vote is 7.00pm tuesday night
That's when the first vote on the amendments takes place, there's so far 13 amendments that need to be voted on first.
The final vote on the Meaningful Vote is scheduled for 10pm.
Wild idea here, but does anything think the Cabinet have even coalesced around a plan B yet? Unofficially of course. It'd be nice to think May will at least be able to present a coherent plan B to the House pretty soon after the MV without yet more bloody resignations.
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Well she also wants the deal brought into force, and a public vote at the least risks that and more likely ensures it won't. If it is going to be rejected might as well have it be by parliament. She can then do the same thing later as Corbyn and co will do, and claim their Brexit plan would have worked out great, had parliament but given them the chance.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
I don't understand this 'pass the deal contingent on a referendum to confirm it' suggestion for the MV. Leaving aside all the comments that a referendum would be a terrible idea, since of course the government would say that at this moment in time, how exactly is it better for them to pre-concede that? It doesn't seem more likely to guarantee the deal is on the ballot, since something has to go up against remain anyway, and given Labour are currently still following policy of pretending they can do a renegotiation why would they accept a deal confirmed by referendum before they've even gone through their motions of defeating the deal, then trying out a GE and so on?
I presume that's why you consider it unlikely, but it seems really really unlikely because it cuts of political angles too soon.
The vast majority of opposition MPs would back Deal subject to a #peoplesvote. The leadership would have to acquiesce.
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Well she also wants the deal brought into force, and a public vote at the least risks that and more likely ensures it won't. If it is going to be rejected might as well have it be by parliament. She can then do the same thing later as Corbyn and co will do, and claim their Brexit plan would have worked out great, had parliament but given them the chance.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
I don't understand this 'pass the deal contingent on a referendum to confirm it' suggestion for the MV. Leaving aside all the comments that a referendum would be a terrible idea, since of course the government would say that at this moment in time, how exactly is it better for them to pre-concede that? It doesn't seem more likely to guarantee the deal is on the ballot, since something has to go up against remain anyway, and given Labour are currently still following policy of pretending they can do a renegotiation why would they accept a deal confirmed by referendum before they've even gone through their motions of defeating the deal, then trying out a GE and so on?
I presume that's why you consider it unlikely, but it seems really really unlikely because it cuts of political angles too soon.
The vast majority of opposition MPs would back Deal subject to a #peoplesvote. The leadership would have to acquiesce.
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
Entirely possible. I'm pretty sure we won't like No Deal if we get it and there will be a scramble to agree something, anything, to get out of it.
That is why it shouldn't be described as "No Deal". "Deal Still to be Agreed" would be more accurate, whether it turns out to be comprehensive free trade deal or something that falls short of that.
The UK's negotiating position would also be far stronger in negotiating that deal if we have left before it is agreed. There would be no point from the EU's point of view in continuing to offer next to nothing at its own expense in the hope that the UK would have second thoughts about leaving. Instead, the EU would for the first time have to deal in the reality of making something work that had already happened.
Strongly disagree. The stuff in the WA is the stuff the EU wants. Under "No Deal" deals, they would get it in exchange for uncommitted ad hoc arrangements instead of the framework that gives us much more certainty and value. Also No Deal will be chaotic Legally there's no basis for reinstating a "transition period", although the EU may find a way round out. All this makes abandoning Brexit much more likely.
I can't stress this enough: the transition period is the Brexiteer's bestest, bestest friend. It allows the UK to be out and for people to think nothing has changed.
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Well she also wants the deal brought into force, and a public vote at the least risks that and more likely ensures it won't. If it is going to be rejected might as well have it be by parliament. She can then do the same thing later as Corbyn and co will do, and claim their Brexit plan would have worked out great, had parliament but given them the chance.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
I don't understand this 'pass the deal contingent on a referendum to confirm it' suggestion for the MV. Leaving aside all the comments that a referendum would be a terrible idea, since of course the government would say that at this moment in time, how exactly is it better for them to pre-concede that? It doesn't seem more likely to guarantee the deal is on the ballot, since something has to go up against remain anyway, and given Labour are currently still following policy of pretending they can do a renegotiation why would they accept a deal confirmed by referendum before they've even gone through their motions of defeating the deal, then trying out a GE and so on?
I presume that's why you consider it unlikely, but it seems really really unlikely because it cuts of political angles too soon.
The vast majority of opposition MPs would back Deal subject to a #peoplesvote. The leadership would have to acquiesce.
Dream on Foxy.
If May wants it passed, that is what she has to do, and she knows it.
Bizarrely, Corbyn and May are two peas in a Brexit pod. If May hadn't insisted on pursuing a one-party Brexit, they'd've worked out a Brexit compromise together and we wouldn't have arrived at the current harmful stalemate.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Well she also wants the deal brought into force, and a public vote at the least risks that and more likely ensures it won't. If it is going to be rejected might as well have it be by parliament. She can then do the same thing later as Corbyn and co will do, and claim their Brexit plan would have worked out great, had parliament but given them the chance.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
I don't understand this 'pass the deal contingent on a referendum to confirm it' suggestion for the MV. Leaving aside all the comments that a referendum would be a terrible idea, since of course the government would say that at this moment in time, how exactly is it better for them to pre-concede that? It doesn't seem more likely to guarantee the deal is on the ballot, since something has to go up against remain anyway, and given Labour are currently still following policy of pretending they can do a renegotiation why would they accept a deal confirmed by referendum before they've even gone through their motions of defeating the deal, then trying out a GE and so on?
I presume that's why you consider it unlikely, but it seems really really unlikely because it cuts of political angles too soon.
I think an amendment for a confirmation referendum at this stage will not succeed because it will not have Labour support for the reasons you give.
It is possible that the deal is brought back in Plan B with a confirmation referendum, or it is even just possible on Tuesday evening, when it is clear that the Deal is going down big time, that the government agrees to the amendment or allows a free vote on it so it passes, even without Labour support. This way, May has some chance of her Deal being agreed by the people over the heads of MPs.
Any idea what time the Deal gets mullered on Tuesday? I doubt I'll be able to watch it live, but as many as can should do so, it will be a moment of history to see the first formal step toward us remaining.
Division is expected to be called at 10pm with the result due at circa 10.15pm.
However this may move if more amendments are accepted.
Sky just said vote is 7.00pm tuesday night
That's when the first vote on the amendments takes place, there's so far 13 amendments that need to be voted on first.
The final vote on the Meaningful Vote is scheduled for 10pm.
If May wants it passed, that is what she has to do, and she knows it. .
But she won't do that before it is defeated. Like so many of the other factions even if she/they are willing to consider another option, their rhetoric and posturing has ensured they cannot back down from their present position until X happens, in her case losing the MV by historic proportions and being utterly humiliated. She'd make a fool of so many of her supporters to cave on a referendum in advance, and she took them for fools too much when she pulled the MV in the first place.
Wild idea here, but does anything think the Cabinet have even coalesced around a plan B yet? Unofficially of course. It'd be nice to think May will at least be able to present a coherent plan B to the House pretty soon after the MV without yet more bloody resignations.
I think the cabinet has, but Mrs May hasn't.
What plan B do you think the cabinet has coalesced around?
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Well she also wants the deal brought into force, and a public vote at the least risks that and more likely ensures it won't. If it is going to be rejected might as well have it be by parliament. She can then do the same thing later as Corbyn and co will do, and claim their Brexit plan would have worked out great, had parliament but given them the chance.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
I don't understand this 'pass the deal contingent on a referendum to confirm it' suggestion for the MV. Leaving aside all the comments that a referendum would be a terrible idea, since of course the government would say that at this moment in time, how exactly is it better for them to pre-concede that? It doesn't seem more likely to guarantee the deal is on the ballot, since something has to go up against remain anyway, and given Labour are currently still following policy of pretending they can do a renegotiation why would they accept a deal confirmed by referendum before they've even gone through their motions of defeating the deal, then trying out a GE and so on?
I presume that's why you consider it unlikely, but it seems really really unlikely because it cuts of political angles too soon.
The advantage of a Deal contingent on a referendum is that it is cut and dried, which isn't the case for most of the other alternatives. If the referendum carries the deal is already enabled and if it fails, it just requires a letter to be sent to Brussels immediately cancelling Article 50.
I don't expect it to happen for political reasons but it could be the only option available to May if the Deal falls and No Deal is prevented.
Wild idea here, but does anything think the Cabinet have even coalesced around a plan B yet? Unofficially of course. It'd be nice to think May will at least be able to present a coherent plan B to the House pretty soon after the MV without yet more bloody resignations.
I think the cabinet has, but Mrs May hasn't.
What plan B do you think the cabinet has coalesced around?
Pivot to Norway for now.
Then tweak it for the long term.
This would require an extension/revocation of Article 50.
Any idea what time the Deal gets mullered on Tuesday? I doubt I'll be able to watch it live, but as many as can should do so, it will be a moment of history to see the first formal step toward us remaining.
Division is expected to be called at 10pm with the result due at circa 10.15pm.
However this may move if more amendments are accepted.
Sky just said vote is 7.00pm tuesday night
That's when the first vote on the amendments takes place, there's so far 13 amendments that need to be voted on first.
The final vote on the Meaningful Vote is scheduled for 10pm.
Are all those amendments going to get as far as a vote?
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Well she also wants the deal brought into force, and a public vote at the least risks that and more likely ensures it won't. If it is going to be rejected might as well have it be by parliament. She can then do the same thing later as Corbyn and co will do, and claim their Brexit plan would have worked out great, had parliament but given them the chance.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
I don't understand this 'pass the deal contingent on a referendum to confirm it' suggestion for the MV. Leaving aside all the comments that a referendum would be a terrible idea, since of course the government would say that at this moment in time, how exactly is it better for them to pre-concede that? It doesn't seem more likely to guarantee the deal is on the ballot, since something has to go up against remain anyway, and given Labour are currently still following policy of pretending they can do a renegotiation why would they accept a deal confirmed by referendum before they've even gone through their motions of defeating the deal, then trying out a GE and so on?
I presume that's why you consider it unlikely, but it seems really really unlikely because it cuts of political angles too soon.
The vast majority of opposition MPs would back Deal subject to a #peoplesvote. The leadership would have to acquiesce.
Dream on Foxy.
If May wants it passed, that is what she has to do, and she knows it.
110 is value.
You don’t understand the Tory party. It wouldn’t be tolerated.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Well she also wants the deal brought into force, and a public vote at the least risks that and more likely ensures it won't. If it is going to be rejected might as well have it be by parliament. She can then do the same thing later as Corbyn and co will do, and claim their Brexit plan would have worked out great, had parliament but given them the chance.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
I don't understand this 'pass the deal contingent on a referendum to confirm it' suggestion for the MV. Leaving aside all the comments that a referendum would be a terrible idea, since of course the government would say that at this moment in time, how exactly is it better for them to pre-concede that? It doesn't seem more likely to guarantee the deal is on the ballot, since something has to go up against remain anyway, and given Labour are currently still following policy of pretending they can do a renegotiation why would they accept a deal confirmed by referendum before they've even gone through their motions of defeating the deal, then trying out a GE and so on?
I presume that's why you consider it unlikely, but it seems really really unlikely because it cuts of political angles too soon.
The vast majority of opposition MPs would back Deal subject to a #peoplesvote. The leadership would have to acquiesce.
Dream on Foxy.
If May wants it passed, that is what she has to do, and she knows it.
110 is value.
The Betfair rule doesn't include amendments. That's why it is 110.
If May wants it passed, that is what she has to do, and she knows it. .
But she won't do that before it is defeated. Like so many of the other factions even if she/they are willing to consider another option, their rhetoric and posturing has ensured they cannot back down from their present position until X happens, in her case losing the MV by historic proportions and being utterly humiliated. She'd make a fool of so many of her supporters to cave on a referendum in advance, and she took them for fools too much when she pulled the MV in the first place.
Sure, I also think she will most likely cave in after a humiliating defeat rather than before, but she may just want to skip the humiliation by going straight to a #peoplesvote on the Deal. I reckoned £2 at 110 on 340+ ayes is value, but it also covers a number of other scenarios causing a major Labour revolt such as permanent customs union.
I acknowledge I am a pessimistic sort, but truly, why would it change anything in advance of the MV? Absent some drastic new indisputable legal facts, the reasons why the backstop is necessary/ok/a terrible injustice but cannot be avoided or whatever, have been well advanced to MPs by now. If they are persuadable at all on the deal then they must be waiting to see if other options get ruled out, not some new non binding promise or clarification, and the hard core of leavers and remainers have their reasons for saying no which would be entirely unaffected since they have their reasons in already, such as needing the WA itself changed, or that the people have changed their minds.
Any idea what time the Deal gets mullered on Tuesday? I doubt I'll be able to watch it live, but as many as can should do so, it will be a moment of history to see the first formal step toward us remaining.
Division is expected to be called at 10pm with the result due at circa 10.15pm.
However this may move if more amendments are accepted.
Sky just said vote is 7.00pm tuesday night
That's when the first vote on the amendments takes place, there's so far 13 amendments that need to be voted on first.
The final vote on the Meaningful Vote is scheduled for 10pm.
Are all those amendments going to get as far as a vote?
Any idea what time the Deal gets mullered on Tuesday? I doubt I'll be able to watch it live, but as many as can should do so, it will be a moment of history to see the first formal step toward us remaining.
Division is expected to be called at 10pm with the result due at circa 10.15pm.
However this may move if more amendments are accepted.
Sky just said vote is 7.00pm tuesday night
That's when the first vote on the amendments takes place, there's so far 13 amendments that need to be voted on first.
The final vote on the Meaningful Vote is scheduled for 10pm.
Are all those amendments going to get as far as a vote?
Maybe Bercow won't accept some of th...ahahahahaah.
The stuff in the WA is the stuff the EU wants. Under "No Deal" deals, they would get it in exchange for uncommitted ad hoc arrangements instead of the framework that gives us much more certainty and value.
They wouldn't get it without the UK getting much more back in return. As things stand under the WA, we have got very little in return for throwing in all our best cards prior to the next two years of negotiations, in which the UK has been set up to get well and truly shafted.
Bizarrely, Corbyn and May are two peas in a Brexit pod. If May hadn't insisted on pursuing a one-party Brexit, they'd've worked out a Brexit compromise together and we wouldn't have arrived at the current harmful stalemate.
I think that's a nice dream, but Corbyn's imperative was to ensure we Brexit without Labour being involved in anyway so they take no blame. May should have tried, but it seems seriously unlikely it would have worked, since Corbyn would essentially have just come up with tests that ensured anything the Tories suggested could not work.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Well she also wants the deal brought into force, and a public vote at the least risks that and more likely ensures it won't. If it is going to be rejected might as well have it be by parliament. She can then do the same thing later as Corbyn and co will do, and claim their Brexit plan would have worked out great, had parliament but given them the chance.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
I don't understand this 'pass the deal contingent on a referendum to confirm it' suggestion for the MV. Leaving aside all the comments that a referendum would be a terrible idea, since of course the government would say that at this moment in time, how exactly is it better for them to pre-concede that? It doesn't seem more likely to guarantee the deal is on the ballot, since something has to go up against remain anyway, and given Labour are currently still following policy of pretending they can do a renegotiation why would they accept a deal confirmed by referendum before they've even gone through their motions of defeating the deal, then trying out a GE and so on?
I presume that's why you consider it unlikely, but it seems really really unlikely because it cuts of political angles too soon.
The vast majority of opposition MPs would back Deal subject to a #peoplesvote. The leadership would have to acquiesce.
Dream on Foxy.
If May wants it passed, that is what she has to do, and she knows it.
110 is value.
The Betfair rule doesn't include amendments. That's why it is 110.
My understanding is on the MV, so it doesnt matter whether it is amended or not, though it would have to be proposed by the government.
Any idea what time the Deal gets mullered on Tuesday? I doubt I'll be able to watch it live, but as many as can should do so, it will be a moment of history to see the first formal step toward us remaining.
Division is expected to be called at 10pm with the result due at circa 10.15pm.
However this may move if more amendments are accepted.
Sky just said vote is 7.00pm tuesday night
That's when the first vote on the amendments takes place, there's so far 13 amendments that need to be voted on first.
The final vote on the Meaningful Vote is scheduled for 10pm.
Are all those amendments going to get as far as a vote?
Depends on Parliament but I'd expect so.
I hope so as it will show who votes for which amendment and the strength of the amendment
If a referendum on deal or remain won I would be content for TM to action it
I know she is still working on trying to frighten the no dealers and unicorn dealers back on board, but that talk is only making the remain side stronger at the same time.
Evening all so as more no deal resignation threats surface does this give the previous anti-dealers sufficient cover to back the deal in the name of party unity and avoiding a GE?
The stuff in the WA is the stuff the EU wants. Under "No Deal" deals, they would get it in exchange for uncommitted ad hoc arrangements instead of the framework that gives us much more certainty and value.
They wouldn't get it without the UK getting much more back in return. As things stand under the WA, we have got very little in return for throwing in all our best cards prior to the next two years of negotiations, in which the UK has been set up to get well and truly shafted.
Another point I should have made. No Deal - really no deal - is only viable if the UK and EU don't have arrangements on anything at all, ever. Which is nonsense. The moment we say, we do actually need stuff is the moment when a bad deal is better than no deal.
I acknowledge I am a pessimistic sort, but truly, why would it change anything in advance of the MV? Absent some drastic new indisputable legal facts, the reasons why the backstop is necessary/ok/a terrible injustice but cannot be avoided or whatever, have been well advanced to MPs by now. If they are persuadable at all on the deal then they must be waiting to see if other options get ruled out, not some new non binding promise or clarification, and the hard core of leavers and remainers have their reasons for saying no which would be entirely unaffected since they have their reasons in already, such as needing the WA itself changed, or that the people have changed their minds.
It probably won't, but it does provide handy cover for any leavers now inclined to fall in line.
Reading that it sounds like she could be preparing the case for a general election?
Obviously she know's her deal will be voted down but this reads like she's setting out the case fir why she's got to take her deal to the people as Parliament is being so unreasonable?
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
I don't understand this 'pass the deal contingent on a referendum to confirm it' suggestion for the MV. Leaving aside all the comments that a referendum would be a terrible idea, since of course the government would say that at this moment in time, how exactly is it better for them to pre-concede that? It doesn't seem more likely to guarantee the deal is on the ballot, since something has to go up against remain anyway, and given Labour are currently still following policy of pretending they can do a renegotiation why would they accept a deal confirmed by referendum before they've even gone through their motions of defeating the deal, then trying out a GE and so on?
I presume that's why you consider it unlikely, but it seems really really unlikely because it cuts of political angles too soon.
The vast majority of opposition MPs would back Deal subject to a #peoplesvote. The leadership would have to acquiesce.
Dream on Foxy.
If May wants it passed, that is what she has to do, and she knows it.
110 is value.
The Betfair rule doesn't include amendments. That's why it is 110.
My understanding is on the MV, so it doesnt matter whether it is amended or not, though it would have to be proposed by the government.
The Betfair rule states "This market refers to the FIRST MEANINGFUL VOTE ONLY. Any vote on amendments do not count.". Do you understand it? I don't.
There will be a series of amendments, some of which may pass, (but do not count). The final vote will be either on the unamended motion if no amendments pass (FIRST MEANINGFUL VOTE ONLY??) or the amended motion, ... but amendments don't count !?
Evening all so as more no deal resignation threats surface does this give the previous anti-dealers sufficient cover to back the deal in the name of party unity and avoiding a GE?
1) Caring about party unity more than Brexit would seem highly out of character
2) Surely in order for a GE to seem on the cards enough to need to be avoided either the DUP or a bunch of Tories have to look like they would back a Labour vote of no confidence
3) Antidealers, not without justification, could say opposing the deal would be a vote winner, and a GE with a stronger brexit position would be a good thing
4) Why would no deal resignations prompt such action from anti dealers, many of whom resigned or supported the deal resignations. "I'm so against the deal I resigned/publicly backed those who resigned. But now some of my opponents might resign if their policy fails, I guess I better back it"
Reading that it sounds like she could be preparing the case for a general election?
Obviously she know's her deal will be voted down but this reads like she's setting out the case fir why she's got to take her deal to the people as Parliament is being so unreasonable?
Not really - likely knows the remainers will force through a referendum and do the work for her
Reading that it sounds like she could be preparing the case for a general election?
Obviously she know's her deal will be voted down but this reads like she's setting out the case fir why she's got to take her deal to the people as Parliament is being so unreasonable?
Possibly, but I think she really is trying to get the Headbangers on board. They are the ones not voting for her deal.
Reading that it sounds like she could be preparing the case for a general election?
Obviously she know's her deal will be voted down but this reads like she's setting out the case fir why she's got to take her deal to the people as Parliament is being so unreasonable?
It has been long assumed she would pivot to a referendum at the least, given most of her tactics have seemed to be talking to the country rather than trying to win over parliamentary factions (she has talked to them a whole bunch though), but it will be an epic u-turn.
The Tories are in no shape to fight a GE - 100 Tory MPs who voted down her deal would then stand under a promise to approve it after a GE? Or however many who would resign if no deal becomes policy would stand under a promise to go ahead without a deal?
Any idea what time the Deal gets mullered on Tuesday? I doubt I'll be able to watch it live, but as many as can should do so, it will be a moment of history to see the first formal step toward us remaining.
Division is expected to be called at 10pm with the result due at circa 10.15pm.
However this may move if more amendments are accepted.
Sky just said vote is 7.00pm tuesday night
That's when the first vote on the amendments takes place, there's so far 13 amendments that need to be voted on first.
The final vote on the Meaningful Vote is scheduled for 10pm.
Are all those amendments going to get as far as a vote?
The Speaker will say "All those in favour say Aye. All against say No". If voices are raised for both Aye and No, the Speaker will say "Division" and a vote will be taken. If no-one shouts Aye (or No), then there is no need for a vote and the Ayes (or Noes) will have it. I suspect all the amendments will be contested so there will be a Division and vote on each of them.
Evening all so as more no deal resignation threats surface does this give the previous anti-dealers sufficient cover to back the deal in the name of party unity and avoiding a GE?
1) Caring about party unity more than Brexit would seem highly out of character
2) Surely in order for a GE to seem on the cards enough to need to be avoided either the DUP or a bunch of Tories have to look like they would back a Labour vote of no confidence
3) Antidealers, not without justification, could say opposing the deal would be a vote winner, and a GE with a stronger brexit position would be a good thing
4) Why would no deal resignations prompt such action from anti dealers, many of whom resigned or supported the deal resignations. "I'm so against the deal I resigned/publicly backed those who resigned. But now some of my opponents might resign if their policy fails, I guess I better back it"
Yeah I suppose so but while I know that the deal will pass before March 29 I still can't see how the fuck it happens.
I know she is still working on trying to frighten the no dealers and unicorn dealers back on board, but that talk is only making the remain side stronger at the same time.
This has been her problem all along. She is telling two completely contradictory pack of lies to to different audiences. Whatever she says to pull one set closer to supporting her shit deal strengthens the other lot.
Reading that it sounds like she could be preparing the case for a general election?
Obviously she know's her deal will be voted down but this reads like she's setting out the case fir why she's got to take her deal to the people as Parliament is being so unreasonable?
I don't think that a general election will solve anything, as most candidates would still be anti-Brexit (even if they are keeping it quiet). The chance of getting a majority of pro-Brexit MPs is vanishingly small. So any likely near future Parliament is likely to have a Remain/BINO majority, and we would be back to square one.
Evening all so as more no deal resignation threats surface does this give the previous anti-dealers sufficient cover to back the deal in the name of party unity and avoiding a GE?
1) Caring about party unity more than Brexit would seem highly out of character
2) Surely in order for a GE to seem on the cards enough to need to be avoided either the DUP or a bunch of Tories have to look like they would back a Labour vote of no confidence
3) Antidealers, not without justification, could say opposing the deal would be a vote winner, and a GE with a stronger brexit position would be a good thing
4) Why would no deal resignations prompt such action from anti dealers, many of whom resigned or supported the deal resignations. "I'm so against the deal I resigned/publicly backed those who resigned. But now some of my opponents might resign if their policy fails, I guess I better back it"
Yeah I suppose so but while I know that the deal will pass before March 29 I still can't see how the fuck it happens.
When you figure it out let me know, since I see no realistic path to it. But with Sir Kevin Barron on board May is about 1.2% of the way toward winning the vote on the deal, so maybe it is not so bad.
Reading that it sounds like she could be preparing the case for a general election?
Obviously she know's her deal will be voted down but this reads like she's setting out the case fir why she's got to take her deal to the people as Parliament is being so unreasonable?
The dreamland Peoples Vote wishers don’t understand that a general election is much more likely - precisely because it is far easier to legislate for.
Reading that it sounds like she could be preparing the case for a general election?
Obviously she know's her deal will be voted down but this reads like she's setting out the case fir why she's got to take her deal to the people as Parliament is being so unreasonable?
I think she'd prefer a referendum to a GE, but she'll probably want a Deal versus No Deal referendum (to continue her blackmail strategy and honouring the first referendum) but it won't get a majority in parliament.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
I don't understand this 'pass the deal contingent on a referendum to confirm it' suggestion for the MV. Leaving aside all the comments that a referendum would be a terrible idea, since of course the government would say that at this moment in time, how exactly is it better for them to pre-concede that? It doesn't seem more likely to guarantee the deal is on the ballot, since something has to go up against remain anyway, and given Labour are currently still following policy of pretending they can do a renegotiation why would they accept a deal confirmed by referendum before they've even gone through their motions of defeating the deal, then trying out a GE and so on?
I presume that's why you consider it unlikely, but it seems really really unlikely because it cuts of political angles too soon.
The vast majority of opposition MPs would back Deal subject to a #peoplesvote. The leadership would have to acquiesce.
Dream on Foxy.
If May wants it passed, that is what she has to do, and she knows it.
110 is value.
The Betfair rule doesn't include amendments. That's why it is 110.
My understanding is on the MV, so it doesnt matter whether it is amended or not, though it would have to be proposed by the government.
The Betfair rule states "This market refers to the FIRST MEANINGFUL VOTE ONLY. Any vote on amendments do not count.". Do you understand it? I don't.
There will be a series of amendments, some of which may pass, (but do not count). The final vote will be either on the unamended motion if no amendments pass (FIRST MEANINGFUL VOTE ONLY??) or the amended motion, ... but amendments don't count !?
I interpret that the MV vote is the one independent of whether any of the ammendments pass or fail the vote.
I thought it worth £2 at 110. There are other scenarios that might lead to lots of opposition MPs voting the Deal through.
Evening all so as more no deal resignation threats surface does this give the previous anti-dealers sufficient cover to back the deal in the name of party unity and avoiding a GE?
1) Caring about party unity more than Brexit would seem highly out of character
2) Surely in order for a GE to seem on the cards enough to need to be avoided either the DUP or a bunch of Tories have to look like they would back a Labour vote of no confidence
3) Antidealers, not without justification, could say opposing the deal would be a vote winner, and a GE with a stronger brexit position would be a good thing
4) Why would no deal resignations prompt such action from anti dealers, many of whom resigned or supported the deal resignations. "I'm so against the deal I resigned/publicly backed those who resigned. But now some of my opponents might resign if their policy fails, I guess I better back it"
Yeah I suppose so but while I know that the deal will pass before March 29 I still can't see how the fuck it happens.
When you figure it out let me know, since I see no realistic path to it. But with Sir Kevin Barron on board May is about 1.2% of the way toward winning the vote on the deal, so maybe it is not so bad.
I think Barron is more concerned about No Brexit, If you add the 2017 figures for Tories and UKIP together they are almost a match for his vote. UKIP nearly got 30% of the vote in 2015! Barron is vulnerable to a No Brexit and he is just covering his arse!
Reading that it sounds like she could be preparing the case for a general election?
Obviously she know's her deal will be voted down but this reads like she's setting out the case fir why she's got to take her deal to the people as Parliament is being so unreasonable?
The dreamland Peoples Vote wishers don’t understand that a general election is much more likely - precisely because it is far easier to legislate for.
It's not "trespassing". The Spanish Navy has every right under UNCLOS III to exercise non-disruptive passage through British territorial waters just has the RN has the same right in Spanish waters.
If we do end up in a war I do hope some aide-de-camp has the presence of mind to turn his sidearm on The Fireplace Salesman as the opening salvo of the conflict.
Reading that it sounds like she could be preparing the case for a general election?
Obviously she know's her deal will be voted down but this reads like she's setting out the case fir why she's got to take her deal to the people as Parliament is being so unreasonable?
The dreamland Peoples Vote wishers don’t understand that a general election is much more likely - precisely because it is far easier to legislate for.
That would also be covered in the 340+ band, if there were to be a GE as the price of Corbyn backing the Deal. It would have to be binding, so less likely than a #peoplesvote.
Evening all so as more no deal resignation threats surface does this give the previous anti-dealers sufficient cover to back the deal in the name of party unity and avoiding a GE?
1) Caring about party unity more than Brexit would seem highly out of character
2) Surely in order for a GE to seem on the cards enough to need to be avoided either the DUP or a bunch of Tories have to look like they would back a Labour vote of no confidence
3) Antidealers, not without justification, could say opposing the deal would be a vote winner, and a GE with a stronger brexit position would be a good thing
4) Why would no deal resignations prompt such action from anti dealers, many of whom resigned or supported the deal resignations. "I'm so against the deal I resigned/publicly backed those who resigned. But now some of my opponents might resign if their policy fails, I guess I better back it"
Yeah I suppose so but while I know that the deal will pass before March 29 I still can't see how the fuck it happens.
When you figure it out let me know, since I see no realistic path to it. But with Sir Kevin Barron on board May is about 1.2% of the way toward winning the vote on the deal, so maybe it is not so bad.
Of course the irony is that if the WA does pass that would in fact be leaving with no deal. We still need to negotiate that. 97.3% of the problem is that the idiots are confusing the WA with the final agreement.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
I wouldn't rule out a dramatic concession such as a #peoplesvote to pass the deal with Labour votes.
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
The vast majority of opposition MPs would back Deal subject to a #peoplesvote. The leadership would have to acquiesce.
Dream on Foxy.
If May wants it passed, that is what she has to do, and she knows it.
110 is value.
The Betfair rule doesn't include amendments. That's why it is 110.
My understanding is on the MV, so it doesnt matter whether it is amended or not, though it would have to be proposed by the government.
The Betfair rule states "This market refers to the FIRST MEANINGFUL VOTE ONLY. Any vote on amendments do not count.". Do you understand it? I don't.
There will be a series of amendments, some of which may pass, (but do not count). The final vote will be either on the unamended motion if no amendments pass (FIRST MEANINGFUL VOTE ONLY??) or the amended motion, ... but amendments don't count !?
I interpret that the MV vote is the one independent of whether any of the amendments pass or fail the vote.
I thought it worth £2 at 110. There are other scenarios that might lead to lots of opposition MPs voting the Deal through.
Perhaps. In which case it would have been clearer if Betfair has said the FINAL MEANINGFUL VOTE ONLY.
Off to bed now, but can I heartily recommend going to see "Stan and Ollie". It is a great film, and amazing performances all round, heartwarming and poignant without being schmalzy. It has put me in a fine mood for the week.
Evening all so as more no deal resignation threats surface does this give the previous anti-dealers sufficient cover to back the deal in the name of party unity and avoiding a GE?
1) Caring about party unity more than Brexit would seem highly out of character
2) Surely in order for a GE to seem on the cards enough to need to be avoided either the DUP or a bunch of Tories have to look like they would back a Labour vote of no confidence
3) Antidealers, not without justification, could say opposing the deal would be a vote winner, and a GE with a stronger brexit position would be a good thing
4) Why would no deal resignations prompt such action from anti dealers, many of whom resigned or supported the deal resignations. "I'm so against the deal I resigned/publicly backed those who resigned. But now some of my opponents might resign if their policy fails, I guess I better back it"
Yeah I suppose so but while I know that the deal will pass before March 29 I still can't see how the fuck it happens.
When you figure it out let me know, since I see no realistic path to it. But with Sir Kevin Barron on board May is about 1.2% of the way toward winning the vote on the deal, so maybe it is not so bad.
Of course the irony is that if the WA does pass that would in fact be leaving with no deal. We still need to negotiate that. 97.3% of the problem is that the idiots are confusing the WA with the final agreement.
Comments
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1084568861213638656?s=21
Here's hoping that night proves a metaphor for Brexit, with Remain wining in injury time!
Indeed I have just had the price of a pint on the Betfair Exchange at Ayes greater than 340 at 110. Sure it is unlikely, but not that unlikely.
...I'll get my coat.
I had to go pubic with that one...
I'll get my white coat.
I presume that's why you consider it unlikely, but it seems really really unlikely because it cuts of political angles too soon.
The final vote on the Meaningful Vote is scheduled for 10pm.
I can't stress this enough: the transition period is the Brexiteer's bestest, bestest friend. It allows the UK to be out and for people to think nothing has changed.
I know he's not alone.
https://twitter.com/KateEMcCann/status/1084574926496022529
110 is value.
It is possible that the deal is brought back in Plan B with a confirmation referendum, or it is even just possible on Tuesday evening, when it is clear that the Deal is going down big time, that the government agrees to the amendment or allows a free vote on it so it passes, even without Labour support. This way, May has some chance of her Deal being agreed by the people over the heads of MPs.
I don't expect it to happen for political reasons but it could be the only option available to May if the Deal falls and No Deal is prevented.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1084574422781042688
Then tweak it for the long term.
This would require an extension/revocation of Article 50.
If a referendum on deal or remain won I would be content for TM to action it
Obviously she know's her deal will be voted down but this reads like she's setting out the case fir why she's got to take her deal to the people as Parliament is being so unreasonable?
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1084576601692614656
There will be a series of amendments, some of which may pass, (but do not count). The final vote will be either on the unamended motion if no amendments pass (FIRST MEANINGFUL VOTE ONLY??) or the amended motion, ... but amendments don't count !?
2) Surely in order for a GE to seem on the cards enough to need to be avoided either the DUP or a bunch of Tories have to look like they would back a Labour vote of no confidence
3) Antidealers, not without justification, could say opposing the deal would be a vote winner, and a GE with a stronger brexit position would be a good thing
4) Why would no deal resignations prompt such action from anti dealers, many of whom resigned or supported the deal resignations. "I'm so against the deal I resigned/publicly backed those who resigned. But now some of my opponents might resign if their policy fails, I guess I better back it"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rother_Valley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
The Tories are in no shape to fight a GE - 100 Tory MPs who voted down her deal would then stand under a promise to approve it after a GE? Or however many who would resign if no deal becomes policy would stand under a promise to go ahead without a deal?
I thought it worth £2 at 110. There are other scenarios that might lead to lots of opposition MPs voting the Deal through.
If we do end up in a war I do hope some aide-de-camp has the presence of mind to turn his sidearm on The Fireplace Salesman as the opening salvo of the conflict.
May likes a bit of a dramatic surprise.
I've been a bit busy over the weekend. Has this Brexit malarkey been sorted yet?
This will at least make people realise that its not just the backstop that is preventing this from getting a majority.
That seems to be her message tonight but maybe she will say I have done my best, so farewell, its up to you now.
Mind you, that would be out of character